MondayMorningInsight - Leadership & Encouragement for Church Leaders

It’s Election Day in Ohio… Who Should I Vote For?

Posted by: Todd
Posted on: Tue, March 04, 2008
Viewed 107
(39) comments so far

Let me hear from you. Again, just who you’re supporting and one reason why.

Todd

Well, it's Super Tuesday II, and election day here in Ohio. The candidates are down to four. And I'm still torn. Ohio is going to play big in the Democratic side of things. On the Republican side, I think it's pretty well determined. I don't want to get all political here, but... really... who are you voting for? Just a name and one reason why. Everyone is allowed one vote and no rebuttal to anyone else's post.

Comments

if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.

C.R. on Wed, March 05, 2008

Funny how politics brings out the “best” in us! As a fellow christian, I’m wondering how God would view our defending the killing of innocent babies and taking care of the poor, yet not glorifying him in the way we do it. It’s sort of inconsistent with what he teaches us to do and be. We can justify a position on almost anything, but I think he also cares about the way in which we represent him when we make our point. There seems to be a lot more attitude than love coming across in some of these messages….out of the same mouth comes blessings and curses.

No, there aren’t any ideal choices, but we should all agree to let God influence our decisions. Maybe he wants to change our minds to be more in line with his somewhere along the way.
Daniel on Thu, March 06, 2008

Just a couple notes of clarification for brother Jack.

First, I should just say that Christian nonviolence is precisely rooted in the firm belief that only God is holy, just and righteous. Therefore, as the apostle Paul says, we leave vengeance to God (cf. Romans 12-13).

Second, we don’t need to agree about ‘just war’ and pacifism. I find just war folk to be quite sensible. It’s one thing to say that, it’s another to make the obviously false claim that this administration’s war in Iraq is ‘just’. None of the criteria for what makes a war just according to classical just war theory allows for calling what U.S. soldiers have been led to doing in Iraq ‘just’.

My point is this: critique of this administration’s eagerness for war is common to both pacifists (such as myself) and just war theorists.

Further, war affects more than the bodies it kills. There’s material infrastructure which is destroyed and which directly affects those who depend on it. There’s the psychological damage to individuals, soldiers and the national psyche. This may not put it on par with abortion, but it certainly makes it non-trivial.

Perhaps you’re comfortable saying that evil A outweighs evil B and so therefore we should endorse B, but I’m wary of actively joining forces with a known evil simply because it’s not as bad as it could be…

All that to say: we’ll vote or not vote as we please, and as appeases our conscience, but I don’t think there’s an political option to celebrate in this election. So let’s stop pretending like everything’s going to be hunky-dorey if candidate X gets elected.

My two cents.

-Daniel-
Rev_Shane on Thu, March 06, 2008

I ask this in all sincerity! If God is the same yesterday, today and forever and in the Old Testament he had the Israelites go to war and in fact told them to not let anyone live including women and children (which makes me cringe but God is God so I must leave it with him. I would not have done that it seems heartless but he is a God of love and knows beyond my knowledge).

Then, isn’t war sometimes the better choice over pacifism? Isn’t war justified in some instances when the few lives lost will save many more lives (and those being innocent lives)? If someone breaks into my house (not because I am a Christian but because they are sick people) and wants to rape my wife and kill my children, Should I not defend my family and children or should I sit on the couch and watch it happen.

I think the greater evil would be to tolerate the violence rather than to respond to it with justifiable immediate justice. I could call the authorities but then it would be too late. I realize God is the only one holy but according to Romans, “Rom 13:1-5 13 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.”

Doesn’t that appear as though God has ordained some earthly authorities with the sword? I really would like a pacifist answer to my honest question. I know we are to turn the other cheek but to me that passage seems to indicate when we as an individual are smitten for the sake of Christ.
Daniel D. Farmer on Thu, March 06, 2008

Shane, you’ve got it backwards. Start with Jesus, who says “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor’ and ‘hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemy and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be like your Father in heaven, since he causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Even the tax collectors do the same, don’t they? And if you only greet your brothers, what more do you do? Even the Gentiles do the same, don’t they?” (Matthew 5:43-7, NET)

The tension is not how we fit Jesus into God (as it were), but how the Old Testament portrait of God is (or is not?) compatible with his perfect revelation in Christ.

But ignoring all of that for a moment. Even if we take the Old Testament wars as normative, and consequently believe that war is somehow thereby justified. Who now is the people of God, divinely legitimated to go to war? The U.S.A.? The Church? Modern-day Israel? You’ve got some sticky unpacking to do if you go down that route.

Further, you cannot start reading Paul on the authorities in Romans 13 without first reading Romans 12: “Do not avenge yourselves, dear friends, but give place to God’s wrath, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay,” says the Lord. Rather, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in doing this you will be heaping burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” (Romans 12:19-21, NET)

The point is clear: while God may use governments to execute his ‘wrath’, Christians are to have no part in it. To the extent that the government wields violent lethal power, the Christian cannot be a part of it. The logic of Romans 12-13 demands this, and the entire practice of the early Church bears this out.

As far as your ‘pacifist dilemmas’, let me throw a question back at you: does the ends ever justify the means?

If you had to rape a little girl to save 20 lives, would you do it? (I hope your answer is no.) So then why would killing your enemy (not exactly love in my book) be any different, regardless of the outcome?

If you’re genuinely curious about Christian pacifism, read anything by Stanley Hauerwas (cf. link on my blog), or read either John Howard Yoder’s “the politics of Jesus”, or Walter Wink’s “Jesus and nonviolence”. Both should help you understand where I’m coming from.

Sorry for the longwindedness.

Cheers,

-Daniel-
Brian L. on Thu, March 06, 2008

Daniel,

Please allow me a question, and I’m truly interested in your ideas on this, not looking to win an argument (I’m lousy at that kind of thing anyway! http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif).

When Jesus is speaking to the issue of loving your enemies, who is He speaking to? Is he speaking to individuals (as a group) or to a government?

I think that the answer to this determines how the passage is applied.

My purpose in asking is that I feel that Jesus’ words here are directed to us, not to governments. In other words, I am directed to love my enemy, turn the other cheek, etc. I don’t believe that the context or direction of His words here are for governments.

How does a government love its enemy? How does a government turn the other cheek? Does not doing these things open that government and the country open to even more oppression?

I appreciate the thoughtfulness of your comments.

Brian L.
Brian L. on Thu, March 06, 2008

Daniel,

I need to clarify something: I think Jesus’ words are for the CHURCH, not for governments.

Hope that clears up any confusion I may have caused with my last post…

Brian L.
Daniel on Fri, March 07, 2008

Brian, you’re exactly right. Jesus’ words are for Israel. Or more precisely, the New Israel he forms around himself: the Church. But I think it’s a mistake to introduce the modern dichotomy between government and individual(s).

In the Biblical imagination, Israel’s true calling is to live with “no king but God” (cf. I Samuel 8). The Church inherits this calling and is therefore rightly called a ‘Christian’ nation.

Therefore nonviolence is required of all Christians.

If a particular government feels the need to be lethally violent, for whatever reason (however apparently ‘legitimate’), then a Christian should have no part in it (this is the logic of Romans 12&13;, where Paul simultaneously affirms God’s use of the Roman! government’s ‘sword arm’ and the Christian’s duty not to be involved with that violence).

Am I making sense? (Perhaps we can continue this conversation on my blog…)
Brian L. on Fri, March 07, 2008

Thanks, Daniel. I’ll do some more reading in Romans 12 & 13.

Not sure we’ll see eye-to-eye on it, but I knew I could count on a gracious and thought out answer.

One thing I appreciate about you - no one can say you spout the party line about any issue. You actually think through it, and are gracious in your disagreement. Thanks.

Brian L.
Online Tax Refunds on Wed, December 23, 2009

TaxCut is relatively inexpensive, and so is TurboTax, and so is TaxAct, and so is doing the forms yourself with a pen and a calculator! All of these things cost way less than hiring someone would.
Online Tax Refunds